Thursday, October 23, 2014

I can’t think of one art form that has died; perhaps this is
because art, by definition, depicts an enduring aspect of the human experience.
I have no worries that photography will be the first to perish.But there is something gnawing at its soul
that I find intriguing.A few things,
actually.

Photography is probably the most accessible “art” form we
have.Everyone takes pictures.Many, many people play an instrument, but
it’s unlikely that you’ll record your friend or family member’s playing and
listen to it daily.We do that we
photographic images, though.Our walls
and refrigerators are plastered with photographs, most of which were shot by
amateurs.It’s an art form whose price
of entry is almost nothing, which makes the price of being “exceptional” very
high.The talent, equipment, and
dedication required to rise above the ocean of camera-wielders is astounding.

And it’s a spectrum: Aunt Sally’s images blend
into the enthusiast’s, which blends into the talented professional, which
blends into top 2% of photographers.This blending makes it difficult to evaluate and critique, two necessary
conditions of any art form.That’s a
nibble, I think; a gnawing.

So many photographers, working on so many levels, makes it difficult to find paid work: full-time photographers are undercut
by part-timers who will do the job at half the price; part-timers are undercut
by Freebies.All of this is being
discussed endlessly and hopelessly.The
unspoken challenge is that less work also means slower improvement; even the
best photographers improve by virtue of working.

Unlike ever before, artists are working in an environment
where “free” is a common price point.There’s free music on the internet; free books in the library; free news;
free concerts; free performances; and apparently “free” (but often stolen)
images on the web.And when things
aren’t free they can be “bulk rate.”Netflix gives you unlimited movies for a monthly, bulk fee.“Free” art is less common among artists who produce
a physical object that can be hefted around your apartment—like a painting or
sculpture; but if it can be turned into something intangible—a song, an image, or a movie—then there is a growing expectation it can be had for
free.Munch-much goes Death on the ankle
of Photography.

The accessibility of photography also leaves us drowning in
images in a way that has never happened in the history of our or any other art
form.Our hard drives are clogged with
unprinted and forgotten images.I worry
that this surplus devalues truly exceptional images.My mother passed away last year, and each of
the limited number of photos of her are a treasure.I don’t think I would feel so attached to them if I had inherited a hard drive with a thousand images.Worse, I don’t think those few would have
stood out in a sea of mediocre images. Historically, painters have had the same
complaint of museums: hang a work of art next to twenty other paintings and what do you get? A mind-numbing experience.I can think of few things more chilling than
my work contributing to the numbing of the public’s response to photography.Munch-munch.

On the bright side, there has never been more of a demand
for images.With the internet, we live
in an increasingly visual world. This means opportunity for more money, creativity,
and excellence.Two forces are clearly
at play here.How will we navigate them?

Monday, October 20, 2014

Everyone makes mistakes.Frankly, it’s how I got into the business.I’d been taking pictures basically since
childhood, and in later life was blessed with working in careers and
environments that put those talents to use.Before I ever considered myself a professional, my images appeared on
the cover of International Musician and Engineering Magazine, several CDs,
brochures, and marketing materials for numerous theatre companies.It wasn’t until a friend-of-a-friend asked me
to take their picture on the spur of the moment that I started down the path of
considering myself a professional.Because the picture I took really sucked.I was rushed, should have switched lenses,
the color was off, the shadows were grim.In short I screwed up.So I
challenged myself to learn 100 new things
about photography over the next 100 days.And I did.It took some elbow
grease, but it wasn’t all that hard.

The hard part isn’t ingesting
new information, it’s regurgitating it.You’ve seen a penny tens of thousands of
times, but I’ll bet you can’t remember which way Lincoln is facing?That’s because the mind goes through two
different processes in learning: taking it, and synthesizing it.It’s the same reason that you can check your
watch, but if your friend asks you what time it is a moment later you have to
look again.I knew that my “book”
learning wasn’t of much help without practice.

The smart choice is to call upon your friends and family to
act as your subjects.I was never very
good at that, so I looked for opportunities to volunteer my services for
low-pay, low-stakes jobs.That required
throwing up a quick website of my previous work.After a few jobs—and the realization of just
how much even a low-stakes job required, hours of prep and digital editing--I realized I needed to charge something
closer to a professional fee.So last
January I re-vamped my website and officially hung out my shingle.I’ve been both cautious and ambitious in the
jobs I’ve sought and taken.Over the
past 10 months I’ve shot for two marketing agencies, a wedding, three CDs,
several corporate events, and half a dozen individual sessions.My clients have included the international
companies Illy Coffee, Levi Strauss, and Kromtech; local musicians, actors, and
models; a Pulitzer Prize winner; fashion start-ups and more.Each has been a challenge and that has kept
me engaged and energized.

And then I screwed up.This isn’t ancient history, something I can look back on with a rueful
smile; this was a couple of weeks ago.I
was shooting a highly personal “life event.”A personal project dealing with loss and death.It was, in some respect, a ritual.My beloved Nikon 35-70mm f2.8, my work-horse
and go-to lens, developed a loose internal part in the focusing mechanism.The result was a fractional bit of random “jiggle
room” in the focusing mechanism, and a varying degree of blur depending on
where in the jiggle you were.At its
best the blur resembled defraction; at its worst the images were unusable.

I didn’t notice it.We were shooting outside on the beach.There was bright light, sand getting everywhere, we were working around
the waves, and I was managing the pressure of performance.It wasn’t until I returned home and saw the
images (about half of the shoot was with this lens) and investigated my quipment
that I realized what had happened.I was
beyond mortified; I felt sick to my stomach.I could say it was just a mechanical malfunction, but in truth I should
checked my LCD for more than exposure and composition when I was in the field;
I should have brought a loop to shield the glare on the screen; I should have
slowed down and I should have mixed up my lens choices more. The problem wasn’t
purely mechanical.

Learning number 101 ain’t pretty.But the lesson here is in how to both prevent
failure and deal with it.

There are
drawbacks to continually checking your images (or crimping), but there’s also a
way to do it.

2 .Shoot a series of shots before checking your LCD
so you don’t destroy the flow of a session

3 .When you do crimp:

a.Check your composition

b.Check the aesthetics of your exposure

c.Check your actual
exposure using the histogram

d.Check your focus at 100%

4 .Bring a loop to outdoor sessions

So what do you do when you fail?Here’s what I did.First I prioritized the digital editing from
the session so I could finish the images ahead of schedule.With careful editing I was able to fully
redeem about 80% of the session; the remaining 20% was “passable” but below a
professional level.I sent the images to
the client ahead of schedule, explained what had happened, and offered a
re-shoot if they were dissatisfied with any of the images.

This is what I did.Luckily, my client was so pleased with the first 80% that they didn’t
mind the shortcomings in those 20%.But
I’m not patting myself on the back anytime soon.Almost every
session is a ritual of sorts, a special occasion, and as such is un-repeatable.My failure took something
away from my client that cannot be replaced.

Monday, September 15, 2014

I love my SB800 flashes. I have three of them, all purchased used, and
I rue the day one of them finally conks out on me because frankly, I don’t
think Nikon has improved upon them with the 900 series.Both of these top end flashes do something
more than illuminate your subject.You
can use them to assist your auto-focus, even when you don’t want to use flash
photography.

Even the best lenses will start to hunt back and forth for focus when light levels get too low. Cameras focus based on contrast (which is why it will hunt when pointed at a brightly lit, but blank surface).

SB 800s and 900s have an “AF Only” (located in the AF Menu
on the strobe itself) that turns off the flash.It works best when your focus mode is AF-S, or “Auto Focus Single Servo”
mode.

So the next time you want to engage in some available,
low-light photography but need the auto-focus to work without hunting, give it
a try.

Friday, September 12, 2014

This week's offerings: Ever try to make a High Key portrait with just one light? Martin Ziaja at Lighting Rumours shows you how. Scott Kelby's Crush the Composition video, an hour-long presentation, started my foray into video learning; worth checking out. "Defraction" is one of those concepts most photographers put off learning. No better teacher to turn to than Cambridge in Color for an in-depth understanding. Serge Ramelli is one of the savviest indoor architectural photographers I know. This video covers the basics to advanced techniques.

Wednesday, September 10, 2014

“In order to see, we must forget the name of the thing we’re
looking at.” - Claude Monet.

Painters, I think, excel at this.Our mind furiously interprets everything we
see, which means it can difficult to discern objects in a two dimensional
space, flattened on an image.When we
observe leading lines, for example, we have “forgotten” what the object are,
and for a moment see only lines.Geometry divorced of meaning.The
same can be said for color.It’s
surprising what we see when we forget that we’re photographing “Nancy,” and only see
light, shape, and color.There are some
tricks for making this happen.

Shoot RAW plus BW
JPEG.Photographers like Gregory Heisler
advocate for shooting in dual mode, but where your LCD will show you the image
in black and white.I doubt he does it
himself (he shoots primarily with film), but it can be helpful in seeing the
essence of the subject, especially people.

Turn your images
upside down to dodge and burn.This
technique I use frequently when working on important images.Our eyes naturally gravitate to certain
areas-- faces, eyes, smiles, center, or thirds.These are areas that help the mind interpret the subject and meaning.This natural tendency, though, undermines the
non-interpretative part of our minds. We may not see, for example, that the
subject isn’t the brightest area.Flipping the image upside down removes meaning from the image and leaves
just light and geometry.I will dodge
and burn the non-people parts of the image upside down; I’ll rotate upright for
individuals.

If the light is
perfect, turn around.This is a
great adage.It isn’t helpful most of
the time, but it’s a good practice because when it is helpful you get something completely outside the box of your
thinking.We tend to narrow our choices
when we pick our angles and decide what is the “right” light.It’s necessary, but it destroys the
possibilities that come from working against our instincts and exploring what
benefits can be found in photographing the “problem” rather than the solution.

“Forgetting the name” of the thing you’re photographing isn’t
just about keeping your options open.It’s
about removing the constraints of meaning.

Monday, September 8, 2014

I’ve noticed that the marketing department has gotten a hold
of the term “parabolic.”Photographic
umbrellas are popping up with that name rather generically attached to them,
when they aren’t really parabolic at all.

True Parabolic

A parabolic umbrella is designed to reflect the light from a
flash back in a focused beam. They are always
silver lined, and the intensity of light can be up to 16 times the light emitted
from a softbox using the same flash.The
light itself is a unique blend: punchy, and at lower power will focus in a
similar manner to a grid, with a gentle feathering into darkness.For that reason, they tend to be pricey.Parabolic reflectors have to be very precise
to do this: a precise number of panels, precise depth in the umbrella, and
precise placement of the flash to get the correct bounce.

Faux Parabolic

Well, really there are two types of faux parabolic.One is a watered-down parabolic; the other
just false advertising.Umbrellas with a
parabolic structure but lined with white interiors are of the watered-down variety.The white interior spreads out
and softens the beams; they’re only marginally more focused that plain ole’
umbrella.

Sadly, some manufacturers are falsely labeling white umbrellas as “parabolic” for the sake of advertising. White umbrellas do not focus the light, and therefore don't have parabolic qualities. White umbrellas with black backs do not focus the light or have parabolic qualities, they simply limit the "spill" that results from light passing through the umbrella.

Plain Ole’

If you compare your average white umbrella to a parabolic,
it’s easy to forget they are great tools for shaping and softening light. Don't disparage your plain ole white umbrella. For the greatest flexibility, get one with a removable
black cover to better control the light.

What to Buy

There’s no reason not to buy a plain white umbrella.They’re cheap.They’re great.For a destination wedding I actually bought a
compact white rain umbrella.It worked great and fit inside my carry-on.

If you’re going to buy a parabolic umbrella, my advice is
don’t got half way.You can get a white
lined/black exterior non-parabolic umbrella pretty cheap, and they’ll perform
much the same.If you buy a parabolic,
buy silver-lined and do your research.Paul C. Buff’s PLM line are reportedly true parabolics, and they’re
quite cheap.Westcott is also known to
be true, but pricey.The tests I’ve seen
on the Flashpoint silver umbrella looks promising, too.There’s a quick test to see if it’s a true
parabolic.Set up your flash/umbrella
and dial it down to its lowest output. Aim the umbrella at a blank wall.Take a picture.The illumination should feather smoothly into
darkness.Then take a picture of the
inside of the umbrella (using your flash, of course).The umbrella should be lit with distinct
ribs-- not all white.

Friday, September 5, 2014

Link Friday Returns! There are a number of website that provide free brushes and textures for Photoshop. If you don't know Qbrushes.net, check them out. The Strobist website is one of the richest resources around for learning about flash photography (well, it's become a little introspective of late, but the resources are still available-- and awesome). Download their free ebook, Lighting 101. Ken McCordall is a veteran photographer, a working man's workingman. He's got a nice set of tutorials on his website, including this one on photographing food. Looking for a location for your shoot? Shothotspot is awesome for that.

I wouldn’t normally write a full-scale product review,
especially of a well-known piece of equipment; but when researching my purchase
I found surprisingly few reviews of the Pentax 645D.The camera is already a generation old—the
impressive 645Z already garnering praise.Recent price drops for the 645D suggest it’s about to be discontinued.
Typically, you wouldn’t write a review of a product about to vanish, either. In
this case, however, not only is the original model now available in the used
market at less than halfthe cost,
but I suspect it will attract a second­-generation following that will endure
for another five years.And while a few
large websites and individuals have written (and uploaded video) reviews, I’m
also surprised by the number of specific features, advantages, and disadvantages
that have gone unmentioned.So my review
will be light on the general information available elsewhere, and focus on user
experience and some of the unique features, quirks, and considerations that
surprised me as a new owner.

This article should, in many
respects, be considered a “Preview.” I’ve shot just two sessions with the
camera so far-- a wedding (yes, my first camera-outing was an intensely
demanding wedding, something I would never recommend) and a
musician’s portrait.In both cases I
brought the 645D as my back-up, and between the two events I pressed the
shutter maybe 200 times.Total.So my experience with the camera is fledging.

One must always understand that
the camera, any camera, is a tool.Full
format DSLRs are remarkably versatile and designed to be almost identical in
terms of use and output—there’s little difference between top of the line
DSLRs-- so it’s not surprising that we forget that are tools designed for
specific uses.In this respect, it’s
better to conceive of the Pentax as a lens...
these we understand to have unique uses, strengths, and weaknesses.The Pentax 645D is designed to slow you down,
make you take fewer (and better) shots.For a medium format it’s remarkably versatile, but it’s not the best
choice as your “go to” for weddings, sports, or events.In many of those situations the gorgeous
sensor would be wasted; you’d see little difference between your full-frame and
the 645D.But in certain situations the
images are a class above, and even the most mundane of subjects are transformed
into a painter’s still-life.

But to the details.And with 40MP there are details to spare.

Build, Specs, Et
Cetera

Much has been said about the Pentax 645D build, so I won’t
repeat others.Safe to say, it’s an
impressive, heavy, ergonomically-intelligent
piece of equipment.It fits nicely in my
hands, which are fairly large, and the heft helps to stabilize the
unit—something necessary because neither the 645D or its lenses come with image
stabilization.If you’re a
natural-low-light shooter, you should be aware of the lack of
stabilization.Despite the weight, the
645D is as comfortable to handle as my Nikon D600.

Operational Features of Note

The Green Button.My god, why haven’t Canon and Nikon adopted
this feature?This programmable button,
conveniently located near your thumb, can set the correct exposure
automatically.If you are in Manual mode
and adjust your aperture, for example, the shutter speed adjusts automatically
at the touch of a button.Or your ISO,
if you so choose.It’s an incredible
time-saver for manual mode shooters.

The ISO button is located right by
the shutter release where frankly it belongs.My Nikon D600 (a lovely camera) has ridiculously placed the ISO button
in the lower left corner of the camera back.As a part of the triangle of exposure, it should be where you can adjust
it as easily as your shutter and aperture.The Exposure Compensation button sits right beside the Green Button in
its familiar place.Your AE and FL lock
buttons are smartly located on either side of your thumb.These are all great.I’m adjusting to the placement of the FL and
Green button so close to each other; with my eye to viewfinder my thumb
sometimes reaches to the wrong one.

What’s lacking?It would be great if there were at least a
couple of completely programmable buttons.In my opinion, there’s no need for two
dedicated buttons to set the image file type/size for each of the card slots;
that should be in the menu.And on top
of that a button for RAW?I’ve yet to
figure out the value of that being at my fingertips.Typically, I set my image characteristics before a session and don’t adjust.
There’s plenty of real estate for buttons, so give us some other options.

Flash.Here is the 645D’s biggest shortcomings.First, its maximum sync speed is 125.This is actually a bit painful considering
the lowest ISO is 100-- and its native ISO is 200.It baffles the mind why they would cripple
the sync speed below the native
ISO.For those who want to over-power
the sun, don’t bother with your speedlight; you’ll need pull out a big strobe
and neutral density filter.To add salt
to the wound, there’s no ability to cancel the flash from the body. This is
important for people who want to set the ambient light levels before adding the
flash into the mix.Yes, it’s another
fine example of the camera telling you to slow down... turn off the flash at
the source... take your test shots, but really?If you have multiple flashes in your set up, you’ll need to cancel each
one individually. I’ve programmed that function to my D600’s Preview Button.

Spot metering.This is the first camera I’ve owned with spot
metering so precise that you can use it for calculating exposure via the Zone
system.Point it at the brightest spot
and darkest and you can calculate the proper exposure.The spot metering area in my Nikon is too
large to do this well.

Depth of field button.I’ve never seen the value in this
button.Until now.I think part of my problem has been I’ve
always checked the depth of field when it’s shallow; you really see the
difference-- and can appreciate the utility-- when it’s deep.This is especially helpful with medium format
because you have so much more control over focus depth.This function can be mapped to your Off/On
switch: pull it farther to the right and the mirror pops up.The 645D also offers the option to view the
depth of field as an image on the LCD screen.This, however, doesn’t seem much better than just taking a picture.

Viewfinder.If you’ve ready any reviews of the Pentax
645D you’ve heard it has a big, beautiful viewfinder.I won’t contradict this (though I think it’s
perhaps over-emphasized... if you have a good full-frame you probably won’t be
that impressed).The indicators in the
viewfinder, though, are quite good.First, an underline appears under the values (shutter, aperture, ISO)
you can adjust in your current setting.There’s a visual indicator-- and a beep-- when the image is in focus,
and a clear “*” when your AE lock is engaged.Very easy to read and intuitive.I sometimes judge the skill of a photographer by their ability to make
all of their adjustments with their eye to the viewfinder, and this one makes
that easy.

Buffer.Basically 1 image every second.That’s how fast you can shoot.Yes, this has been discussed extensively in
other reviews, and blogs, forums, and comment areas.Many people see this as a profound negative;
I see it as the camera’s way of saying slow
down....Admittedly, it’s not good
for sports photographers and nerve-wracking for weddings, but there was a time
when professionals naturally worked at that speed and produced timeless
results.We need to learn to rely less
on spray-and-rely-on-the-odds and work diligently to hone our craft.It’s that kind of camera.No matter how you look at it, though, the
buffer speed will change the way you shoot and it’s important to consider.

Image write time.This, too, has also been touched upon in many
reviews but it’s important enough to mention:it’s kind of a nuisance.Expect
to wait four seconds for an image to appear.Then if you impatiently attempt to zoom in to check focus the image will
disappear.There’s an option that makes
it possible to zoom during image preview (and you can do it in “play” mode of
course), but it lengthens the write time.Like the buffer speed, the image write time will also change the way you
shoot because there’s no quick check or sharing with your subject.

Shutter life.This disturbs quite a few people, myself
included.The estimated shutter life of
the Pentax 645D is 50,000.Compare that
to the average professional DSLR which has a shutter life of 150,000.That’s a big difference, given how much more
you’re paying for the camera.In all
honesty, I’ve never reached 50,000 on a camera before selling it.Admittedly, this is the first year I’ve shot
as a full on “career professional” so I’m racking up the shutter count, but I
still expect 50,000 to be a five year endeavor on my primary camera, the Nikon
D600.And replacing the shutter
mechanism isn’t the same as replacing the camera.The Pentax asks you to be more thoughtful, to
slow down.There’s no
five-frames-per-second option.I expect
that 50,000 tombstone will take me seven years or more.Others will get there quicker, either because
their work is more demanding or their style less respectful of the camera’s
quiet request.Shutter life is something
to consider.Two months into my
experience as a “career professional,” devoted to making money at my craft, I
decided I needed to take fewer images per session in order to really master my craft.I made my decision independent of
Pentax.The 645D just reinforces it.

Lenses.Unless you already own one of the film
versions of the Pentax 645, you’ll need to factor in a new set of lenses.The good news is beautiful, manual focus
versions of the Pentax 645 lens series are available for a song, many of them
under $250. The camera beeps and flashes when you’re in focus, so there’s not a
huge difference between the manual and auto capabilities.Auto focus lenses get pricey quickly, but you
can acquire a range of very good lenses for about $400 each.Top of the line lenses are like any other
brand... in the thousands.The other
good thing about Pentax lenses?They
didn’t make that many different types.Three or four lenses and you’re set (I’ve got eight Nikon lenses in my
drawer, half of which I don’t use).

Performance Issues

Image Quality & Sensor Size.Much has been
written on this subject as well. Medium format images are, at times, quite
similar to full frame images.In other
circumstances they take on a quality that cannot be produced by a smaller
sensor or recreated in Photoshop.The
sensor in the Pentax 645D is smaller than a traditional 645 format, and it’s
the smallest of the medium sensor formats.Several expensive medium format camera’s use the same sensor.Some photographers who are obsessed with the physicalsize of the Pentax 645D sensor
incorrectly assert that the Pentax isn’t big enough to make a real
difference.I say let them stick to
their theoretical guns.In reality, the
quality difference is easy to see in the 645D and as dramatic as the leap as
transitioning from a crop sensor to a full frame.

ISO.The maximum ISO is 1600.Compared to the newest DSLRs, this is low
(compared to film, frankly I never shot above 400).However, only in the worst of pinches would I
set my Nikon D600 above 2000 because there’s just too much noise for a
professional image.Above 2000 I’m
essentially committing to either a “documentary” color image or an art
Black-and-White.Or a 4x6 print that
could have been taken by Aunt Sally due to the grain (or blur from noise
reduction) and compressed dynamic range.While the Pentax isn’t more sensitive than 1600, the noise it creates at
that ISO is comparable to the noise my Nikon produces at 1,000.That’s pretty awesome. It also opens up the
possibility of underexposing the image at ISO 1600 and correcting in post.

Street photography,
sports, and events.These three have
a common need for quick, spontaneous image taking.I’ve been upfront about the Pentax as a
camera designed to slow you down, but it’s not as simple as that.Certain features, like the Green Button,
speed up the process.In my opinion you can use the 645D for
street photography, but the camera draws a lot of attention.It’s big, eye-catching.And on a per-image basis, comparatively
expensive to shoot. Remember, you only have 50,000 shutter actuations on a
camera that goes for $6K new.You don’t
want to waste those on blurry, poorly composed street images, so it’s a
thinking-photographer’s street tool.Sports:I wouldn’t.It’s just not fast enough.Events: Yes, keeping in mind the same
considerations you would have in shooting on the street.

Conclusions

If the images are both dramatic
and sometimes indistinguishable from a full frame DSLR, who is this camera
for?At $10,000 I would have found that
a difficult question.Currently, though,
the 645D is selling at $6K new, $4.5K used.A Nikon D810 costs $3,300 new and a used D800 runs about $2.4K.There’s a significant price difference
between the two, but also a significant difference as tools.Previously, I used a
Nikon D7000 as my back-up camera.A
decent choice—the D700 is a small step down in image quality but still
professional.However, unless my D600
tanked during a session, it would never come out.And the D600 never tanked.I purchased my Pentax for $4K with under
5,000 shutter actuations.As a back-up
the Pentax risky because it can’t do everything the D600 can.Or at least not as easily.But it also comes out during my sessions to
add value to the work I am creating, something the D7000 never did; it was a
$1200 insurance policy.Right now, at
the current price point, the Pentax 645D is a good choice for a professional
who wants to expand into medium format images.I would not choose the 645D as my sole camera as a professional (well,
maybe if I was a wealthy amateur)... unless I was a
professional landscape photographer.For
other types of photography it doesn’t have the required versatility.As a second camera-- which all professionals
must have-- it’s a choice that enhances your toolbox.

Tuesday, September 2, 2014

I pretty much never review products.Mostly, this is because I rarely buy the
newest, hottest gear.I’m a big fan of
top quality goods that are already a generation old:my bag is stuffed with gems like Nikon 80-200mm
f/2.8, the 35-70mm f/2.8, and SB800s.But I’m making an exception today, both because the product is fairly
new, but also because I think it’s an exceptional deal.

I posted earlier about lighting alphabet soup, which was
essentially a summation of my purchasing criteria. I wanted a bigger strobe than my SB800s, one
that could compete with the sun outdoors.I settled on the Nicefoto 680W.“Nicefoto”
isn’t the most confidence inspiring name to emerge from the smoky factories of China, but I’d
read some good things about it and the specs were excellent.

The Nicefoto 680W is equipped with a rechargeable battery
that other reviewers have found to get 400+ flashes at full strength. It comes
with both an optical trigger and a built in 2.4GHz radio trigger.The power goes from full to 1/64 in full stop
increments.There’s a modeling lamp, and
cooling system.And it utilizes IGBT
technology, which means the flash has a very short T.1 time (up to 1/7,900th
of a second) for freezing the action.Great specs, and at $420 a good price, but how well does it perform?

Features and Build

First, 680 watts is blindingly bright.There’s more than enough power for most people.The unit is built very well-- very sturdy,
well thought-out, fairly heavy, and all the parts fit together snugly. It feels, in short, muscle-bound.The Nicefoto has a host of thoughtful little
features, too. There’s a handle that
folds down for your human light stand, and a hole with tightening screw for
attaching to a non-human light stand. It also has a second small handle that
flips out from the top to make it easier to hold while attaching to said stand.
There’s strap, a cold shoe to clip your radio trigger, and trigger input.The LCD is large and bright, and the
button-interface simple. The only misstep in the design is the umbrella holder,
which is at the top of the handle. The reflector and the umbrella post collide,
making it impossible to use both at once.

Considering how much thought went into the rest of the unit, it’s
baffling and there’s no elegant work-around.The reflector is a Bowen mount, though, which means there are plenty of
attachments available (including reflectors with umbrella holes).

Both the optical and radio triggers work well.It would have been nice if you could control
the output from the trigger.Another odd
over-sight.The trigger appears to be
universal (it works on both my Nikon and my Pentax) and has a pass-through,
which is a great bonus. I can control my other strobes from the camera. The
simplicity makes it easy to use, quick to set-up, and really a joy so far.The modeling light is decent for checking
your shadows, but too weak for anything else; it’s daylight temperature, just
in case 35 watts is enough for your project.

Quality of Light

Independent testing by the folks over at
www.lightingrumours.com verify that the color temperature is 5600; it rises to
a slightly bluer 6300 as you decrease the power to 1/64th.That’s pretty accurate in my book.Recycle time is about 4.5 for a full pop, and
the output is consistent.

Like your hotshoe flash, the IGBT flash times shortens as
the power decreases.In regular mode,
the flash time decreases from 1/320that full to 1/7,600th of a second
at 1/64th power.There’s a FP
mode for that clips it even sharper-- again with a commiserating loss of
power.There are five FP settings, the
slowest (1/2000) is equal to about ¼ power.The fastest (1/7,500) is pretty dinky.Here’s the confusing part for me.In my initial tests, the FB mode doesn’t appear to be any faster than
the regular mode:at ¼ power the flash
fires at 1/1,600th of a second in regular mode.*That’s virtually the same as the FB
mode.The FB mode appears to be a
placebo for the most part, but it’s hard to complain because 1/7,500th
of a second is very fast.

You’ll notice I haven’t mentioned HSS, only FB.These two terms have merged into something
synonymous and they’re not.Frankly, I’m
not sure what FB refers to anymore.The
680W has an FB mode designed to reduce the flash duration.HSS, on the other hand, greatly “lengthens”
the flash duration by turning it into a serious of rapid pulses.HSS is slightly
more useful because it allows a faster shutter speed, thereby reducing the
ambient light.With “FB” (or a short
flash duration) you use ND filters to reduce ambient light. The Nicefoto
doesn’t have HSS capability, but it does have multi-flash, which allows you to
program multiple distinct flashes for long exposure photography. It’s use, for
example, is to show five distinct moments of a dancer’s movement without
photoshop.

Conclusion

All in all I’m impressed with the Nicefoto 680W, and I’m
looking forward to spending some time with it in the field.The wireless design and handle makes it very
efficient, and it performs just as promised.Comparable strobes costs $100-$400 more, which is why I decided to post
a review.

Me Me Me

Ian Robin Walker runs Hurricane Images, a San Francisco / Bay Area photography studio that specializing in Products, Portraits, Entertainment, and Wedding photography. My work is driven by a strong, personal connection with my clients in order to provide truly unique images.

What about me?

Born in North Hampton, Massachusetts/ was told I should be an actor/ spent 25 years working as a theatre director/ created light designs for more than three dozen productions/ started writing plays/ started winning awards/ realized I had always been a photographer when I discovered photographs of me at the age of 11 with a camera in my hands/ began photographing publicity photos for performing artists and theater companies/ started having my photos published major magazines/ met you here, today.

I create high impact imagery in a calm and professional atmosphere that places clients at ease. I am interested in photographing what is unique about you. The majority of my clients are individuals; my business clients include Second Wind Productions, Albany Records, Impact Assessment Inc., the California Department of Public Health, International Musician and Engineering World Magazine, Underground Runway, JB Enterprises, and Triple Shot Productions.